The Day That Roe Died
Okay I know that, technically, the Supreme Court's Gonzales v. Carhart decision did not kill Roe v. Wade. But I can’t help but thinking in about five years you’ll only be able to get a first-trimester abortion and then only in a few states like California, New York, and Washington State.
This is the decision that starts that process. Whether or not this decision ends up blocking only a kind of procedure or all second trimester abortions (a fear some groups have) it’s clearly the tip of the iceberg of the anti-abortion legislation that is going to come faster than anti-abortion trolls on a pro-choice blog.
I'll have more to say later, but the crux is that it's time to dig up Alice Paul. Sorry old girl, I know you died 30 years ago but we need you again.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Remember what Alice Paul said, "Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women."
Jim in Cleveland
Ah, but you can't take that quote out of context. It's been abused by Feminists For Life the same way Frederick Douglas' quote "Do nothing with us" has been abused by those who oppose any legal theories to mitigate the effects of racism and slavery.
Here's
Wikipedia's quote of a 2000 magazine article.
Alice Paul did oppose the linkage between the ERA and abortion, but that was because of her political astuteness rather than any disagreement with abortion. Paul felt that by linking the ERA with abortion, the ERA would not pass through Congress. Willis wrote, "She did not address issues of birth control, i.e., abortion, or even women's sexuality, and was concerned that the radical women of the 1960s might alienate support by emphasizing these issues...[S]he said that even if women did want to do many things that she wished they would not do with their freedom, it was not her business to tell them what to do with it, but to see that they had it."[19] This demonstrates that Alice Paul supported equal rights for women, including the right to choose abortion...[4]
Yeah, Newscat, I did read that Wikipedia piece. But the piece implies a connection that is not there--"This demonstrates that Alice Paul supported equal rights for women, including the right to choose abortion." Huh? Where do they get that? And let us say she supported a woman's right to choose abortion: would that necessarily mean she did not see abortion as an exploitation of women? I would argue that stripping or prostitution would be a choice for women that their "freedom" gave them--yet how can one argue that those do not result in the exploitation of women? The argument, then, that I make is that allowing partial birth abortion does not give women more freedom, any more than legalizing child abuse or infanticide would.
Further, I would argue that while the Douglas quote should not give racists carte blanche to discriminate, it should give liberals with white guilt pause before succumbing to the "do something" illness when it comes to legislation. I say this as someone who works in civil rights law enforcement.
The danger is in using any one quote as evidence that "insert famous historical figure" supports some agenda. If you want to make an argument that "insert historical figure" believed in your particular cause, evidence has to look at the person's whole life and views as well as what they wrote, when they wrote it and what time period it reflected. One quote just isn't enough evidence to argue for or against Alice Paul's support of modern day pro-choice movement but it sounds so *devestating* when used.
The reason why I raised Alice Paul in particular is that, in this day and age, I believe she would be pro-choice. She was definately pro-birth control. Abortion in 1890-1950 was an entirely different affair as well. It *was* dangerous and in many cases women weren't in control of their choices, since they were being made by their families. Abortion might have seemed more draconian, like the view of how China uses abortion to control an unwilling population.(Not to rule out the possibility that some women fully chose to get an abortion pre-Roe. Simply to address that fact that female-centric birth control measures are fairly modern.) I could see, having only seen abortion in that context, coming away with a poor view of it. The book "The Girls Who Went Away" examined the other side of the coin. The women who didn't have abortions but were sent away to give birth, also mostly against their will.
Anyway I liked Alice Paul as a role model, particularly the YOUNGER Alice Paul who was quite radical and downright cheeky.
Fair enough, on using a quote like this. However, I think you are making an assumption that Paul would be pro-choice today, particularly given today's science. Obviously, you are more knowledgable about Paul than I am, so I have to defer to that. But I do not think feminism should ever be equated with being pro-choice, especially when I believe abortion hurts women and the true cause of feminism.
Jim in Cleveland
Post a Comment